N.Ganesan v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 24/02/2020 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.R.SWAMINATHAN CRL OP(MD). Nos.2926 and 3018 of 2020 CRL OP(MD). No.2926 of 2020:

1.N.Ganesan 2.Kalaiselvi ... Petitioners/Accused No. 4 and 2 Vs 1.The Assistant Commissioner Of Police, Law and Order, Ponmalai, Tiruchirappalli.

2.The Inspector of Police, Ariyamangalam Police Station, Ariyamangalam, Tiruchirappalli-10 Crime No.47/2020. ... Respondents/Complainants For Petitioners : M/s.B.Janath Ahmed@b.Janarth Kumar Advocate.

For Respondents : Mr.A.Robinson, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervener : Mr.M.Siddharathan, Advocate. CRL OP(MD). No.3018 of 2020:- Duraipandiyan ... Petitioner/Accused No.1 Vs The State rep.by The Inspector of Police, Ariyamangalam Police Station, Ariyamangalam, Tiruchirappalli-10.

Crime No.47/2020. ... Respondent/Complainant 1/3

For Petitioner : M/s.K.P.Krishnadoss, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.A.Robinson, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervener : Mr.M.Siddharathan, Advocate PETITIONS FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C COMMON PRAYER :- for Anticipatory bail in Crime No.47 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police COMMON ORDER : The Court made the following order :- Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent.

2. The petitioners apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences under sections 294(b), 420 and 506(i) of I.P.C., in Crime No.47 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

3. Both the sides filed typed set of papers. I went through the same. It is obvious that there has been financial transaction between the defacto complainant and A1. The defacto complainant would claim that he had paid a huge sum by way of loan and he did not get back anything. On the other hand the petitioners' counsel would claim that the defacto complainant has been charging exorbitant interest and that they had sofar more than repaid the principal amount. The materials available on record are not sufficient to come to any definite conclusion.

4. Be that as it may, the case against the accused rests on documentary evidence. Therefore, the arrest of the petitioners is not necessary. Hence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Trichy, and on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation. The petitioners shall comply with the conditions stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C scrupulously.

2/3

5. The petitioners shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed.

sd/- 24/02/2020 / TRUE COPY / / /2020 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.VI, TRICHY.

2.DO-THROUGH : THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TRICHY DISTRICT.

3.THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, LAW AND ORDER, PONMALAI, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI.

4.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ARIYAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, ARIYAMANGALAM, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI-10 5.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to M/S.B.JANATH AHMED@B.JANARTH KUMAR Advocate SR.No.3921 +1. C.C. to Mr.K.P.KRISHNADOSS Advocate SR.No.3862 +1. C.C. to Mr.M.SIDDARTHAN Advocate SR.No.4003

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD). Nos.2926 and Date :24/02/2020 IAS TK/PN/SAR.4/28.02.2020/3P/10C 3/3